Initially, let us affirm our position of welcoming the film. We in no way want
our comments to give the impression of disparaging or undermining the sincere efforts
or overall message of the authors and supportive cast, in terms of wanting to
establish a better global socialization for humanity. But we also recognize that
many people in authoritative positions would be quite sympathetic, in a general
sense, that is if they would take time to watch the film; except that they think
their practiced methodology is best suited for the task... but we whole-heartedly
disagree. Those in authority must either lead us towards the establishment of a
New Government (a Cenocracy), follow our lead, or vacate the premises of their
position. If they refuse to do none of the above, we will be forced to evict them.

However, those in authority are not seeking our perspective nor attempting
to establish a dialogue with those of us wanting to pursue greater improvements,
because they arrogantly perceive themselves to have greater experience, intelligence
and wisdom... or at least not let ours over-shadow theirs; whereby they must use
the time they have in their position to pursue career goals— regardless if it
has deleterious effects on the public. They have no interest in our council except
when it can serve their self-centered motivations... many of which are pursued by way of
impulsiveness denoted as reactionary. At such moments when their peers and colleagues
disagree with their views, it is then that some of them will seek the council of
the public's approval by calling for a Referendum; but such a process is not put
into place as an established Constitutional means of directing the government
through the collective council of the people. We are viewed as little more than a
means to the ends those in authority wish to achieve... with or without the public's
approval.

...Such a circumstance propels the collective mind of the public with the
entrenched necessity of committing ourselves to a Revolution. And yet again
those in authority as well as the common-place public, do not perceive the
seriousness with which such persistence is becoming embraced as a factuality amongst
those surveying the social terrain in preparation thereof. Those in authority are not
truly cognizant of how many in the military and para-military civilian (police) forces
will come to stand with the public once our Declaration for Greater Independence
reaches the emblematic stage of a social Manifesto. The Zeitgeist film is part of
this manifesto in the making. And though it is not reviewed by those in main-stream
film or art-critiquing publications so as to define an accepted state of publicized
legitimacy, its underground appeal as a generalized assertion is acquiring an
enterprise of intellectual agreement for a purposive Revolutionary stance to egress
even further.

Yet expressions of societal-governance disapproval, such as the Zeitgeist film
poignantly illustrates, are looked upon by some in authority as a fringe perspective
of a disgruntled few miscreants with mis-hygienic mysticisms projecting personal
woes onto an externalized 'politically correctified' would-be foe with "Establishment"
credentials, and not as a large consensus of the public desiring a Cenocracy.
Our collective views and voice do not matter to them, since they
arrogantly believe they Represent us and know what we are thinking... or should
think, according to the views entertained by those in some authoritative position.
It is not that we are without the necessary clout, we are simply not exercising
our Will— collectively. The Zeitgeist film(s) transgress the "forbidden
corridor" between desire for purposive change and an actual step in that direction.
However, for many of us... it is time that we stand sentinel with flame-lit torches
in hand in order to mark the way for those wanting to go further. We need a detailed
film about conducting a Revolution and not merely an historical review and analysis.

Emphatically... however, we do not need a television series about a group of people
from different walks of life having banded together to conduct a defined Revolution
which leads the people back towards an adoption of the same ridiculous form of
governance and accompanying society we have today. The so-called Democracy
of America is like an early computer code fraught with errors and subject to being
hijacked by various individualized viruses. Nobody in their right mind would want
to create (or re-create) the nonsense being experienced today... and in fact, no
one actually did— because the mess we are in is the product of a series of
patch-work applications due to leaders in business, government and religion that
consistently do not have a far reaching rational vision of existence beyond their
own survival interests within the parameter of a given social sphere. They feel
that what is good for their business (or religion), is good for everyone. Such ideas
are short-sighted piece-meal functionalities for a given selection of life-times.
Recreating a government like the U.S. is like letting a group of Revolutionists
strive for re-creating the Roman or equally disgusting British or Chinese Empires...
some other ancient Kingdom... or Emperor-controlled domain; because they feel such
societies represent some impassable greatness. Follow-up discussions about pursuing
a Revolution must be wide-spread and very public. Every single person must be informed
that a Revolution away from the present nonsense government(s) (and businesses as
well as religions) is being sought. Indeed, those in authority... all authority...
must know how extremely serious we are about establishing a Cenocracy. We are sick
and tired of their falsified Communisms, Democracies and Socialisms... used as
garnished figure-heads for control over the many exerted by a few.

The Zeitgeist film(s) is an attempt to express a given Collective Will by standing
up, stepping forward and speaking with a voice representing numerous shared minds...
It is the attempt to establish a global petition demanding change, that may otherwise
be best introduced nation by nation. But in order to better present our case to the
larger population, we will need a series of films, books, and radio programs. We need
to stir the development of a new culture of thinking collectively, and not rely on
the present forms of vicarious representation that have gotten us into the mess we
are experiencing and have experienced for decades. Clearly, though we disagree with
the directions taken by those in positions which have created the developmental
quagmire we are in, we would like to think that most of those in governing
positions sincerely feel they are making a contribution towards maintaining, if not
creating a better governing structure than any that have come before. We would like
to think that they too want a better life for themselves, their families and the
public... but they are deluded into thinking their strategy is best. But we
neither share in their delusions nor illusions. It is disgusting to be presented
with a government that seeks to answer our call for purposive change, by creating
some societal foe (terrorism) requiring the implementation of another war or the
establishment of another government office to give the impression of pro-activity
instead of being but another step backwards; by going sideways with spit-shined shoes
and pressed slacks carrying another officially designated three-lettered identification
card.

The film is greatly welcomed to those of us sharing a similar venue of social
interest. But we are dismayed as to how obscure it has remained from the public.
However, the content needs to be re-tuned, restructured, and recorded with a wider
lens... even though some effort in a generally serialized comprehensibility was
attempted. A series of films need to be made so that they can be shown in classrooms
during the requisite allotment of class time for different age groups. Many of those
teaching young students about government no doubt believe they live in a Democracy...
regardless of how erroneous we know this to be. Such instructors are not at all
familiar with the views being espoused in the film, as well as privately shared
communications, and will need to be taught how to teach the ideas of a new vision...
or they will continue to teach our young the same falsehoods in order to perpetuate
the many delusions and illusions we have come to see through.

Principally, this present review concerns the "Moving Forward" DVD selection,
since the "Addendum" follow-up appears as an intentioned replication with a more
definitive focus and increased presentation of ideas that contains an accentuation
of the "Venus Project" ideology.
In short, the "Zeitgeist addendum" is a prominent static repetition of the ideas
conveyed in the "Moving Forward" presentation, with an effort to scintillate an
objectified emphasis of aforementioned views. It does, however, provide some other
information about insidious (U.S.) government tactics which foment exceptionally
terrible circumstances for millions of people. Actors and their actions in the U.S.
government's internal and external policies, can be so maliciously bad from time
to time. Such people like playing out evil roles regardless of the consequences
it has on the lives of millions.

To begin with, the viewer is initially presented with the idea of art being
used for a purpose beyond the mere convention of aesthetics. For those not familiar
with the word "Zeitgeist", it is regularly defined as "spirit of the time"—
(or moment, era, etc...) though alternative uses and labeling abound, depending on
one's imaginative inclinations. Nonetheless, in order to better grasp what the authors
of the film may have been attempting to convey as a supportive realization with the
production as both an art form and detailed signature of ideological explication,
it might be of value to momentarily include an excerpt from a Britannica article on
aesthetics:

Kant, Schiller, and Hegel

...Kant's "The Critique of Judgment" introduced the first full account
of aesthetic experience as a distinct exercise of rational mentality. The principal
ingredients of Kant's work are the following: the antinomy of taste, the emphasis
on the free play of the imagination, the theory of aesthetic experience as both free
from concepts and disinterested, the view that the central object of aesthetic interest
is not art but nature, and the description of the moral and spiritual significance
of aesthetic experience, which opens to us a transcendental point of view of the
world of nature and enables us to see the world as purposive, but without purpose.
In that perception, observes Kant, lies the deepest intimation of our nature and
of our ultimate relation to a “supersensible” realm.

Schiller's "Briefe über die ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen" (1795;
On the Aesthetic Education of Man), inspired by Kant, develops further the theory
of the disinterested character of the aesthetic. Schiller argues that through this
disinterested quality aesthetic experience becomes the true vehicle of moral and
political education, providing human beings both with the self-identity that is their
fulfillment and with the institutions that enable them to flourish: “What is man
before beauty cajoles from him a delight in things for their own sake, or the serenity
of form tempers the savagery of life? A monotonous round of ends, a constant vacillation
of judgment; self-seeking, and yet without a self; lawless, yet without freedom; a
slave, and yet to no rule.”

Schiller's "Briefe" exerted a profound influence on Hegel's philosophy
in general and on his "Vorlesungen über die Aesthetik" in particular. In discussions
of remarkable range and imaginative power, Hegel introduces the distinctively modern
conception of art as a request for self-realization, an evolving discovery of forms
that give sensuous embodiment to the spirit by articulating in concrete form its
inner tensions and resolutions. For Hegel, the arts are arranged in both historical
and intellectual sequence, from architecture (in which Geist
[“spirit”] is only half articulate and given purely symbolic expression), through
sculpture and painting, to music and thence to poetry, which is the true art of the
Romantics. Finally, all art is destined to be superseded by philosophy, in which the
spirit achieves final articulation as Idea. The stages of art were identified by
Hegel with various stages of historical development. In each art form a particular
Zeitgeist (i.e., spirit of the time) finds expression,
and the necessary transition from one art form to its successor is part of a larger
historical transformation in which all civilization is engaged.

The incidental discussions of Hegel's "Vorlesungen" introduce most of the themes
of contemporary philosophy of art, though in the peculiar language of Hegelian
Idealism. Nineteenth-century Idealist aesthetics can reasonably be described as
a series of footnotes to Hegel, who was, however, less original than he pretended.
Many of the individual thoughts and theories in his lectures on aesthetics were
taken from the contemporary literature of German Romanticism (in particular, the
writings of Herder, Jean Paul [pseudonym of Johann Paul Friedrich Richter] and
Novalis) and from the works of German critics and art historians (notably G.E.
Lessing and Johann Winckelmann) who had forged the link between modern conceptions
of art and the art of antiquity. The influence of Hegel was, therefore, the influence
of German Romanticism as a whole, and it is not surprising that the few who escaped
it lost their audience in doing so.

It should be noted that the addition of the prologue quote by the Anthropologist
Margaret Mead near the beginning of the "Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" film was not
read with the respect and wisdom as the author(s) no doubt intended... since it is
somewhat tarnished when it is recalled that some of the work Ms. Mead recorded
involving comments of young Island girls in her (coming of age) studies, were later
found to be flawed... after the girls learned to read, write and speak English. They
were humored when they were later able to read her accounts of what they said—
because they had told her what they thought she wanted to hear, and not that which
was actual or factual. The pressures of the age in which Ms. Mead lived and worked
must be taken into account when accessing her views. The addition of her quote did
not do anything to assist in increasing the value of the information which followed.
The information in the film(s) stood well on its own individual merits...

...And while we can appreciate the desire for the material to be available to
a larger global audience made possible by offering multiple translations, what is
being lost in the use of such translations is the attendant cultural sensitivities
of content, context, and communication. Such a realization is readily acknowledged
when English sub-titles are added to foreign films containing numerous mistakes
because of a misunderstanding and misapprehension of cultural subtleties. Whereas
many emotional contexts are readily made translatable via a collective empathy,
this is not the case with intellectual content... which may have to go through
various stages of re-translation— even to grasp the "gist" of what is said.

This movie leaves us with the impression of being targeted to those with a very
elementary (rudimentary) understanding of Anthropology, Banking, Biology, Economics,
History, Penology, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Social work, Sociology as well
as bits and pieces of other subjects... plus those whose knowledge may be
instructively more acute, but have not organized their reflective inclinations towards
a sociologically-global application for improving the conditions of life. It is a
perspective representing a montage of ideas based on selective social perceptions set
into a start-to-finish fashion suggesting a cause and effect progression... and yet
arrives at a suppositional conclusion based on a naive interpretation of what a
responsible solution should entail. While it presents us with a propositional social
architecture based on an altruistic formula of resource management (and distribution),
the draft is a generality without a governing blueprint. In other words, what sort
of government is then best to be used? We want to know the specifics. We can not
rely on some sort of expected exceptional property to emerge as a consequence. We
can not embrace a "build it and they will come" philosophy if the "they"
are much the same as the "those" visionless idiots who have gravitated towards
leadership positions because they have the necessary psycho-pathology for the time
and place.

While the label "Corporatocracy" was portrayed and defined in the "Addendum"
selection, the definition of what type of government the U.S. has— remains
variously described... such as Oligarchy, Plutocracy, Plutocratic-Aristocracy, etc...
We Revolutionists or Reformists as we might refer to ourselves, even
though those advocating a retention of the status quo may view us as Idealists,
Utopianists, Terrorists, Anarachists, or whatever suits their inclination for
disparaging us; have not yet attained a consensus of what word best describes the
government nonsense we are subjected to. But regardless of what one may use, it is
a negligible digression in the larger discourse of our pursuits. However, it should
be mentioned that the film stirred one observer to recall the old technocratic movement
because of expressed similarities. An article from the Britannica on Technocracy may
be of serviceable interest to some readers:

(A Technocracy is a) government by technicians who are guided solely by
the imperatives of their technology. The concept developed in the United States
early in the 20th century as an expression of the Progressive movement and became
a subject of considerable public interest in the 1930s during the Great Depression.
The origins of the Technocracy movement may be traced to Frederick W. Taylor's
introduction of the concept of scientific management. Writers such as Henry L. Gannt,
Thorstein Veblen, and Howard Scott suggested that businessmen were incapable of
reforming their industries in the public interest and that control of industry should
thus be given to engineers.

The much-publicized Committee on Technocracy, headed by Walter Rautenstrauch and
dominated by Scott, was organized in 1932 in New York City. Scott proclaimed the
invalidation, by technologically produced abundance, of all prior economic concepts
based on scarcity; he predicted the imminent collapse of the price system and its
replacement by a bountiful Technocracy. Scott's academic qualifications, however,
were discredited in the press, some of the group's data were questioned, and there
were disagreements among members regarding social policy. The committee broke up
within a year and was succeeded by the Continental Committee on Technocracy, which
faded by 1936, and Technocracy, Inc., headed by Scott. Technocratic organizations
sprang up across the United States and western Canada, but the Technocracy movement
was weakened by its failure to develop politically viable programs for change, and
support was lost to the New Deal and third-party movements. There were also fears
of authoritarian social engineering. Scott's organization declined after 1940 but
still survived in the late 20th century.

In our collectively growing New Government (Cenocratic) dialogue, even though
the film did not emphasize such a description, there was a need for the film to
publicly address an expressed desire for non-violence, non-rioting, and having no
discussions about precipitating a Revolution while at the same time detailing plans
for an armed rebellion or coup... even though the ideas presented in the film are
extremely violent and destructive to the equally violent and destructive status quo.
In other words, it is of value to discuss the necessity for moving forward with a
Revolution as a means for establishing a better societal governing direction, but
do not publicly discuss such in an atmosphere that tries to implement references
to the stock-piling of armaments or intentions for a specific target to be the
recipient of aggression. We need to make this clear to both journalists and those
in the government that have created a dossier on a movement that is gaining ground...
though it is well known that security agencies typically fail to recognize the
beginnings of an historical event which is raging beneath a perceived (relatively
speaking) "social calm". Explicitly stated, a non-violent approach to societal
improvement is desired, but we will not shirk our responsibility if we need to
assert ourselves aggressively.

The film should have addressed the need to avoid setting ourselves up for committing
such actions that our against the law, and could be used against us, even though
many of us are cognizant of the fact that we are headed towards a confrontation.
Throwing money into a pile is not a pacifist practice since such a situation would
create untold dire social problems... because the film did not provide the blueprint
for a smooth changing-of-the-guard ideology. Throwing money into a pile is reminiscent
of the government's own wasteful spending habits. It is like throwing money away...
or good money after bad. Simply stopping to participate in a widespread social function
(such as using money), will not automatically create a wave of alternative change
for the better. Transporting a population from one reality to another will take time,
particularly if the infra-structure outlined in the film is to be implemented. The
day-to-day aches, pains and needs of people will not go away as if subjected to a
binary switching mode. Though throwing money into a pile can be perceived as a
symbolic gesture for getting the public to collectively address the need for excusing
themselves from participating in a system of nonsense; far too many people will not
interpret the situation as a symbol... they will take it literally. There are a lot
of simple-minded people in the public domain just as there are in authoritative
positions.

While the film did show a laudable futuristic picture, it did not provide the
numbered dots for a majority who neither think nor practice an artistic perspective
as outlined. Many people are incapable of the desired and necessary visualization
required to grasp the beauty of the message intended for all the world's peoples.
They can neither visualize all the present nonsensical social policies we are
subjected to nor visualize a path towards a better future by way of an action which
suggests to them the loss of a means they have learned is a vital necessity of life
in the way we presently live. It would be extremely troublesome to expect an entire
population to give up a symbol of livelihood that they are addicted to... but
nonetheless asked to sacrifice for some ideal they can not touch nor see... but
must experience the very real effects of what amounts to as a cold turkey
withdrawal (in other words: a total abstinence from using money and those institutions
which control this bartering and exchange tool).

Many people are unable to see the future that is portrayed in the film. They see
only a film made up of images and sound which do not translate into a recognizable
social portraiture of obtainability available to them. They might not even discuss
it with anyone and thereby not participate in a word-of-mouth telegraphing service
that is needed for the establishment of pursuing a dream to become a reality. It
appears that most people do not like to engage in the initial push or pull of a
snow sled, but they will readily jump aboard once it is in motion.

In other words, for example, if we were to place a troop of actor/actress monkeys
in a complex environmental setting, an audience of monkeys will not recognize the
merits of the environment that the monkeys are in. Both sets of monkeys have an
internalized means of interpreting any and all environments in very general ways,
though one environment may be richer in resources than another. Far too many view
and treat resources in the manner that the DoDo bird was. (Used it to extinction.)
The audience of monkeys will be mostly consumed by the antics and activities of the
actor/actress monkeys themselves. Their perception of the world is particularly
simplistic. The portrayed environment remains fictional and is not seen as a real-live
actor worthy of extended discussion.) Many, many, many people need to have their
hands held when facing an unknown which invites feelings of uncertainty. This is why
such programs as soap-operas, cartoons, game shows and serialized ideations
(fantasies) have large viewer ratings... because they do not present viewers with
situations which require a level of in-depth thinking that might create consternation
that causes red flags of danger to be hoisted up the flag pole of internalized social
mores. In some instances, the theme song of a television show is more recognizable
than those aligned with a serious social practice (such as a national anthem).

Some sort of presently devised bartering system needs to remain so that it can
be replaced by a system which eventually permits money to be replaced by a diplomatic
consensus on behalf of everyone. Giving money back to the "State", no matter how it
is defined, is similar to the notion of giving Caesar back the coinage stamped with
his image on it. Money, like medicine and a myriad assortment of other artificialities,
are only as useful and non-evil as those who are in possession thereof. Most people
would gladly sacrifice their money, time, and effort if this was the rule-of-thumb being
practiced for a sincere cause or as an adopted belief by the majority. Money is not
inherently evil or copies of the Zeitgeist movie(s) would be freely given away and
not bartered out. Money is required to fund the production and resulting efforts to
get its information out, because that is the reality under which we presently live...
despite any and all antagonisms which may be levied against such a system. Yet, the
message being provided falls short of representing the reality that those of us who
share in the desire for establishing an improved lifestyle... byway of adopting a new
form of governance (a Cenocracy)... all too clearly realize we are at the fore-front
of a Revolution. We are fully cognizant that Revolutions take time to mature, that
serendipity frequently lends a hand in developing historical scenarios (even if by
way of a comedy of errors), and that it keeps its own time, temperament and daily
planner.

If the Zeitgeist film happens to evolve into a visible social movement that
threatens the status quo, those advocating change because of the film may no doubt
be referred to as Zeitgeist Terrorists. Humorously noted, just like the youthful
generation of blacks who have adopted the word "nigger" as a sign of affection
amongst one another, the Zeitgeist "terrorists" can do the same. We can tap knuckles
together and say "Hey my Terrorist" followed by a head nod of deference to one
another. We could even develop our own rap "song" and dance routine as an attempt
to portray some "wannabe" (want to be) sophistication, or instead choose to wear
some symbol of "terrorist gang" affiliation. All of our correspondence could contain
the word "terrorist" as a reference to ourselves, and the espoused ideas as Zeitgeist
"terrorism". Instead of giving all the money back, let's give "them" back the word
they like to use as an excuse to conduct all sorts of untoward activities around
the world. Instead of the government being able to use the word "terrorism" and
"terrorist" to fulfill various illegal motivations, we should use it to fulfill
lawful Zeitgeist motivations. After awhile, the government will no doubt instigate
some other ghostly tale and use an "officially" described and journalistically
sanctioned newly devised "public enemy number 1" label to meet the requirement for
carrying out its nefarious deeds. The government is a repository of ghost stories
and attempted myth-creation obfuscations. It snacks on Urban Legends when trying to
think up a new name to be used for blaming someone or something for forcing it to
carry out destructive deeds.

While the authors are no doubt sincere in their desire to address a multitude
of globally occurring concerns, the initial introduction beginning with Biology
instead of planetary and geological science promoted unwarranted stepwise
interpretations and suggested conclusions... though... again, the presented ideas
can readily be seen as an attempt at developing a global discussion... so long as
the proceeds from movie sales go directly to this end. Indeed, the positions,
lifestyles and incomes of the speakers are part of the equation in determining the
ambient factuality of content dismissed of ulterior motives. This is because ulterior
motives abound... even in the most sincerest of intentions.

The film does not adequately address the reality that those presently in charge of
perpetuating the status quo will neither change their inclinations or go away
quietly. They will use whatever means they can, make any under-handed deals that
they deem necessary, in order to undermine efforts for creating beneficial change
for the whole of humanity... if they can not serve out some position on an elitist
societal rung and have access to entitlements they think they are deserving of...
no matter who or how many must play the part of some sacrificial lamb. Many people
are cognizant of this and feel that preparations for the possibility of an eventual
head-to-head confrontation need to be addressed. Preparations for a Revolution can
be made as an intellectual exercise— without discussing armamentation, since
to do so might well invite government legal action. Acquiring explosives, various
projectile weapons, computer 'disrupters', and articles for protracted embattlements
are easy enough to acquire at a moment's notice. There are many who have already
begun to stockpile the necessary goods needed for carrying out a revolution, should
it turn into a bloody and destructive confrontation... but only after we have
submitted an Article of Proposed Revolution— if those in authority do not
heed our -in preparation- requests for developing a Cenocracy.

It is a violent and vicious breed of animal that our Zeitgeistly-Cenocratic ideas
are focused against. Additionally, we also need to be fully aware that if those in
charge of the present status quo reality feel they are losing control, they may well
play out the role of Hitler and want to burn everything to the ground. In short,
they will be sore and spiteful losers who see their wealth and power as indications
of harboring a speciality of purpose... instead of seeing it as we do: a mediocrity
embellished by socio-pathically tempered avarice. We must prepare ourselves for such
a possibility, and be in a position to forestall their efforts... because they will
not care who gets hurt, killed, or what gets destroyed. If they can't have it, then
they want no one to have it— and have no qualms about undermining our efforts
directed at undermining theirs. No doubt, we may even be labeled as terrorists, as
anti-democratic propagandists, even though they themselves are the terrorists and
do not practice an Actual Democracy. They are a filthy, disgusting lying breed of
carnivorous beast-of-prey whose malicious deeds are best carried out under the cloak
of some dark social circumstance they have participated in creating.

But the practice of an Actual Democracy, a point that the film does not
mention, needs to be interviewed with the realization that the implementation of
such may well produce a condition similar to a person winning a large lottery. It
is a circumstance that will no doubt have wide-spread profound effects... and that
some people may experience dire results from. Whereas tales are told of those whose
lottery winnings have created many problems which cause them to decry ever having won
the lottery, others will no doubt prosper well under the social conditions of an
Actual Democracy. Giving a Nation the practice of an Actual Democracy may well be
like giving everyone a vast wealth they are not prepared to handle well. We must
have a social mechanism in place which provides the necessary support, or introduce
the practice of an Actual Democracy in a graduated scale... like that when one
advances due to experience and education. However, it is a scale that must be designed
by the public and remain under the public's direct control, and not some stupid
"Representative" model used to conceal the control of the many by a few.

In addressing the notion of "Obsolescence" in terms of resources and social
structures, it is of necessity to mention that all of biology is inherently marked
for obsolescence. Making long-enduring goods and services instead of throw-away items
may sound good, and may give the impression of being a logical solution to a given
resource issue... but the fact remains that humans die... and so may the entire
human civilization... if evolutionary theory is taken into a broader holistic account;
since we are dealing with a philosophical and mathematical issue based on conclusions
reached by a given set of criteria.

No less, just as our biology is headed for obsolescence, the Sun is headed for
a burnout and the Earths' rotation is slowing down. Such planetary and geological
facts are well known... and yet for all the studies done on biology and sociology,
the incremental effects of these events are not taken into account as to the adaptive
requirements we have... and should be incorporated into any sociological ideology
promoting sustainability, be it specifically entitled "resource" or otherwise.
In short, all life forms, many of which make up our resources, are forced to adapt
to a decaying environment. It is a decay brought about by the natural changes taking
place in the galaxy and solar system, and not those being imposed on us by the
destructions carried out in pursuit of Capitalistic inclinations. Hence, our lifestyle,
whatever it may be called or designed after— with whatever rationalizations
we apply; are following a trend along a similar course of destruction because we
are adaptive organisms. Our ideas, our beliefs, are rationalizations developed as
a mechanism for establishing a relative balance in an incrementally decaying environment.
All too often that which is defined as "progress" is little more than an act of
accommodating an incrementally increasing state of decay, like a re-footing or
re-griping of the reality presented to us by conditions of decay we are unobservant
of, but must nonetheless adapt biologically and psychologically to.

...Hence, any desired change in governance and our social philosophy must include
the necessity of directing efforts towards removing the human species from the
degrading effects of the planet, solar system, and galaxy. These cosmological effects
have nothing to do with human behavior in terms of environmental destruction. In
other words, the behavior of humanity did not create the conditions causing the
trend of ultimate solar system decay. This was set into motion long before life on
this planet came into existence. They are a process of inheritance directed towards
obsolescence. There is no present genetic program written into humanity's DNA which
guarantees the species is meant to exist forever. We must strive to increase our
viability by removing ourselves from an environment marked for obsolescence... or we
will incrementally adapt ourselves accordingly, and find ourselves faced with an
inevitable extinction. Such a realization must underline the fact that all histories
(biological, social, economic, scientific, religious, music, art, planetary, etc.) have
no value if we do not remove the species from its present path of obsolescence.

It is extremely naive of us humans to not consider the possibility
that extinction is written into our collective DNA just as the inevitability of
death appears to be an absolute for each of us individually. Death of the individual
may be a microcosmic representation of a much larger macrocosmic inevitability
that we have not as yet developed a working philosophy for removing ourselves from
this cyclic event. Either by accident (plague, asteroid, etc.) or design, the
extinction of our species may be little more than a biological certainty so long
as we remain tethered to an environment headed towards decay. Developing a new
type of society and/or a new formula of governance is a fool-hardy gesture if we
do not adequately address the circumstances of decay of the species in a decaying
environment.

There must be a concerted social effort, and not some ridiculous NASA (or elsewhere
equivalent) program, to get humanity to build a society away from the effects of
the planet Earth, the solar system, and the Milky Way galaxy. If we leave the exploration
and habitation of space to NASA and its counter-parts in other countries, only those
in control of the resources will be provided the option of getting off the planet
as its demise increases the degradation of effects on human birth, development and
living standards. Humanity must cut the umbilical cord to Mother Earth. This "mommy"
Earth of humanity will not live for eternity. It is dying, and will continue to do
so. Death of the planet Earth, the solar system and the galaxy, are inevitable. That
death is occurring right before our eyes and its effects cause us to make incremental
adjustments in our biology and mentality in attempts to sustain a level of equilibrium
in accord with the conditions we are being presented with. In other words, we are
being forced to make the best of circumstances headed for obsolescence. It is rather
naive to think of creating a better life for humanity and other life forms in an
environmental situation targeted for complete obsolescence. The degradation of our
societies, of our species, is due to the fact that we are being forced to live in
a global environment that is decaying on a planetary, solar system, and galactic
scale. Human businesses, governments and religions of today are short-sighted
philosophies that want humanity to forever cling to the apron strings of this planet,
even as the apron and its strings are being buried in the dust of decay. It is past
time for humanity to practice its exploratory independence beyond the stupid
philosophy adopted by NASA and government advocates; because of budgetary constraints
that mimic the government's constraint against citizen participation in an effort
that rightly belongs to all of us and not just our tax contributions.

If we do not develop a government philosophy which identifies itself, its subject
society and all of humanity as temporary conditions existing in a decaying environment,
regardless of what concerted inter-national effort is exercised to curtail environmental
destructions; and do not employ collaborative developments of removing life from this
decaying situation... our computers will have to be enabled to sustain some part of
human consciousness (if for no other reason than as a footnote of an evolutionary
history with a dead end). Our Artificial Intelligence units will have to be built
with the means of getting off the planet and away from this solar system as well
as this galaxy... but also how to initiate the creation of biological life elsewhere,
with a type of intelligence that does not involve the idiocy humanity is portraying
at this juncture in its history of temporary activity... commensurate with a geological
and planetary time-line of decay.

A philosophy that does not include the insistence of directing humanity to leave
the overall decaying environment and its decadent effects which encourage one
philosophical addiction of rationalization after the other, is simplistic childishness.
In short, it is rather stupid to encourage humanity to develop a social philosophy
supporting an altruistic endeavour suggesting sustainability and growth, when the
very environment where such is to be practiced... is decaying as a natural process
of galactic, solar system, and planetary/geological evolution. This is little
different than encouraging humanity to develop a modern civilization on the precipice
of a cliff... yet hide the existence of the cliff's position in legal small print
and expect everyone to sign an agreement after they have been intoxicated by business,
political and religious nonsense... each sporting their own advertising forms. We
can not let the philosophy of NASA, its counter-parts in other countries, or the
prevailing business, political and religious philosophies to continue directing our
behavior according to their self-serving interests. Their views oppress us from
the freedom necessitating a departure from a planet headed for extinction. We need
a new form of governance which will free us from the chains of such ignorance.

The philosophy of the New Government must entail a widely known and
easily understood realization that any and all social structures developed on Earth
are intended as a short-term means to reach the goal of removing the populace off the
planet. Humanity must somehow reconstitute the itinerate perspective which enabled
it to move away from its earlier primate origins which subsisted on a diet of
territorial claim. Ideas which promote the Earth as belonging to the species of
humanity we have involved into, and requires the responsibility of a stewardship
land owner, need to be replaced with a respectful regard of being a short-term
tenant and guest. We must strive to remove the species, and all species of plants,
insects and animals we can, from the ravages of decadence being presented to us by the
larger planetary 'social' circumstances. No business, no government and no religion...
nor individuals there-in, can be provided with a "living will" which emphatically
states its existence is unquestionably necessary; and must therefore be sustained
at any cost, no matter if its executive leaders are repressive, sadistic, corrupt,
corruptible, or engage in nefarious deeds that would otherwise cause a so-called
"normal" person to be imprisoned, executed, or put out of their misery by way of
some government designed "accident". There is no promised land nor promised people,
if such land and people are to be incrementally sacrificed because a government
philosophy can not see beyond its own greedy self and short-term interests without
taking the long term effects of the planet's heading, into account.

Is it of need to Review general planetary events which
affect biological behavior, even though they were not included in the
film... but should have been, along with the short discussions involving developmental
parameters:

The galaxy is within a Universe said to be either expanding or contracting.
—Both directions admit to change— (Current views lean towards an expansion.)

The Sun is expanding towards Earth on its path towards an eventual burnout.
—Some think it will eventually engulf the Earth—

The Earth's rotation is slowing causing alterations in tidal behavior and the geomagnetic field.
—The giant washing machine will eventually no longer agitate due to its motor stopping—

Note: inside many top-loading washing machines can be seen a triangular-shaped
part called the agitator. Similarly, the shape of the Earth has been referred to as a
triaxial ellipsoid (Much like a squatted pear). The concentric mechanism which causes
the washing machine movement of back and forth agitation, is similar to the eccentricity
of the Moon's effects on tides... due to its proximity to the Earth... coupled with
the effects of gravity and wind. The Moon is receding from the planet and is thus
affecting tidal behavior.

Such cosmological events are not items that might be dismissed while being introduced
to a subjective interpretation and discussion involving some personalized Astrology.
Just because humanity (and more-so less complex organisms) are on the diminutive side
of the effects changing along paths governed by light speeds at far distances, does
not mean humanity is not being affected. Our biology makes incremental adjustments
even though we can not consciously perceive such on macro scales, (even with the
help of as yet non-existing equipment designed with the necessary sensitivity). Our
physiology is adjusting its environmental calibrations like an internalized gyroscope
faced with contouring its orientation tweaked to the settings of an era-specific
equilibrium; in order to maintain a given "field of vision" such as the status quo
of a business, social order or religion. The problem is, that because our body and
our subsequent mental state are "tweaked" by a degree defined as minuscule or
insignificant, we do not realize we are like a fish that has been hooked... but is
being permitted to swim away under the illusion of freedom and liberty... and do
not realize we are being slowly reeled in, because our energy resources are being
depleted in activity that is neither productive nor sustainable due to the
eventual planetary and solar system demise being "orchestrated" beyond our control
(and not necessarily under the direction of some "Intelligent Conductor").

Metaphorically speaking, while some would argue that such cosmological effects
are small, they are nonetheless cumulative and cause "addictions" (such as traditions
and rationalizations) in our thinking, as part of adjusting our biological rhythms
thereto. Traditions and an established status quo thus become externalized
representations of biological rhythms in an attempt to establish some semblance of
permanence in a flux of change. And like a sailor whose adaptation is the requisite
acquisition of "sea legs" which are automated gyrostatic mechanisms of balance;
such an adaptation becomes overlooked and is not recognized as a real phenomenon
until one attempts to walk about on land. Being on land requires the adaptation
of "land legs" which are frequently substituted with emotional and psychological
variations that become easily overlooked by those whose intellectual sensitivities
and sensibilities become calloused and obscured by activities amongst a population
that defines its behavior as normal and therefore natural. Regaining objectivity
requires a difference in emotional and/or intellectual and/or physical settings in
order to be recognized after an experienced period of "jet lag" where senses are
put into a type of short-term hibernation. A re-balancing act then ensues and may
cause moments of exhilaration, exuberance and euphoria, because one takes in a
different emotional and/or intellectual and/or physiological vista. A new setting
may create the need for establishing a new formula... a new approach... a new design
of balance that opens up a door for additional appreciations, possibilities and
rewards.

For example, the developmental usage of a twin-hull craft called a catamaran
was found to have advantages over the traditional usage of a single hulled craft
known as a canoe.

As a variation of the two-hull design, no doubt the usage of a single outrigger
on canoes provided extra stability as well, though the application of two parallel
small hulls might be interpreted as out-riggings.

However, needless to say, the development of a canoe provided an excellent
means of transport for many years before the advent of larger versions leading
into the development of boats and then ships... and must be placed into the context
of admiration for its ingenuity of design, scarcity of materials and required tool
development. While superior materials today assist in transport, durability and
water-way handling, canoes require users to assume some measure of balancing act,
just like riding bicycles, driving a car, and multiple other activities such as
cooking, sewing, artwork, playing cards, checkers, chess or simply walking. The
two-hull version not only offers a point of greater balance, it is faster and
permits connecting the two by a platform which provides added space and physical
accommodations. It proved to be so fast that its usage was not permitted in races
where others used a single-hull design. It had to compete solely with other catamarans.

Like a catamaran with two outboard parallel hulls, external practices of internal
biological rhythms act as a method of increased buoyancy in an unrealized turbulent
sea of cosmologically-related decays. A binary-based computer coding is another,
and the presumed predominance of binary star systems may relate to a balancing act
that our present human understanding of external space beyond the shores of Earth
has not yet learned to grasp the reality of a larger Universal circumference; because
our present notions are akin to a flat Earth hypothesis using terms and mathematical
indices which conceal present science formulated superstitions held within religious-fashioned
test tubes and petri dishes. However, it is important to note the many expressions
of "three-based" balancing methods are also used (amongst other numerically-assignable
configurations), such as the triplet coding system in DNA and RNA, the trio in atoms
(electrons- neutrons- protons), the Earth is the 3rd planet from a source of solar
energy, and the multiple logic triples such as Major premise- Minor premise- Conclusion,
Yin-Unity-Yang, And/Or/Not gates, Red-Yellow-Green (stop lights)— as well as
the customary holding of pens and pencils with three fingers... etc., etc., etc...
See the following pages for variations of the "Threes phenomena":

Creatures of habit that we are, we need to import (through adopted modes of
social/cultural export) the necessary adjustment which permits us to break any habit
that has (non-balancing) deleterious effects; such as that we are now experiencing
on a global scale, though past alterations in government formulas were thought to
be the requisite answer to preventing such abusiveness. Our bodies and minds are
being molded to adopt certain effects in order to sustain a relative equilibrium that
fabricates rationalizations— like trying to adapt our situation to the
diminishing presence of some flotsam left over by a sinking ocean liner; and
adopting a philosophy best suited for the circumstances at hand (such as either
being in a life raft, floating by way of a life vest or wearing a life preserver)
while calling it rational... even though the behavior leading up to the incident
was a comedic mismanagement thriving on the irrational. In other words, if one is
on a life raft they will develop one type of self-governing perspective. Yet if
they are floating by way of a life vest or life preserver (or perhaps some debris),
they will develop a perspective according to the reality of their situation.

Humans all too often call the implementation of an idea or practice which has
superseded an undesirable situation; that which is labeled rational, logical and
good... only to find it too is but another irrationality to be identified at a later
date... though it was the best guess in some former era. This is where humanity is
today. The embraced ideas of yesterday have, in many instances, become unseen pools
of quicksand today. And though some are called superstitions, wives' tales, or malarky,
they were nonetheless thought at one time to be truth.

As a beginning end note, we do not want to imply that the movie(s) are without merit.
On the contrary. Those of us seeking a better life for the whole of humanity (and
fellow life forms) are sincerely grateful for the efforts put into the production
and the ideas being espoused. But there is too much repetition and the expanse of
needed considerations fall short of a desired ideal. Nonetheless, it provides the
semblance of a foundation for a much needed larger effort from alternative perspectives
that would provide a broader insight to other issues which need to be addressed
and comprehensively denoted as a necessity... thus involving the situation which
will prevail as we continue to move forward against the status quo who will want
to impede our intellectual march as it begins taking-on actual physical dimensions.
Some refer to this as a forthcoming Revolution involving sharpened quills that can
be used for arrows, spears and spikes taking on the function of a modernized halberd.
For some, the notion that violence never solves anything is a childish interpretation
of history. Since it is well-known that every form of business, political and religious
governance today is a position acquired by some sort of violence... be it physical,
financial or philosophical. If violence did not serve some purpose, than no government
in the world would use it, because it is extremely costly.

Despite the open-armed welcoming we extend to the producers, cast and promoters
of the film, our view necessarily contends that the movies "Zeitgeist: Moving Forward"
is Moving Sideways and the "Zeitgeist Addendum" only provided an additional footing
of its previous position. It rightfully presents an examination (albeit rather
truncated); regarding some of the steps humanity has taken backwards, though social
leaders and others may call it progress... because the efforts take place on the
other side of the same hill that is all too often overlooked by historians and
journalists. Nonetheless, the film is trying to show viewers a bird's eye view of
the human landscape so that it may better grasp the whole of our social-global setting
and bring everyone to a consensus so that a productive concerted effort might ensue.
Unfortunately, even the view of a high-flying migratory bird leaves us a little
short-sighted. A film is needed which transgresses even this height... attached with
the necessary means of focusing attention by way of a concerted explanation using
both analog (generalized analogy) and digital (specialized analogical) representations.
However, the material and ideas are in some ways rather dated (old fashioned) because
they are entrenched with the prevailing political preoccupations that assist in keeping
us bogged down.

A film addressing a broader philosophy with an encapsulated orientation of action
is needed, and will no doubt subsequently produce a great deal of controversy because
it addresses an organizational formula involving a revolution that appears to be a
necessity in order for the desired transformations to take place. And though it is
not commented on, there exists a silent one-upmanship contest taking place amongst
the world's Revolutionists with respect to the promotion of their views... even
though many might claim otherwise and say that we are all taking different roads
directed towards a similar destination... and is the same comment used by those
taking stock of the similarities seen in all religions... yet their disagreements
precipitate continued conflicts and world-wide misery.

In short, the Zeitgeist film is a 20th century perspective that needs to be
replaced with a 23rd century relativity. Cenocracy.org in conjunction with others,
could do a better film making job if we had the financial wherewithal. However,
there would have to be an open atmosphere of accepted latitude when selecting the
director(s), writers, actors, actresses, and in short, the whole of the production.
We could make a theatrical production that would (figuratively) kick our social
leaders in the shins, punch them in the stomach, and slap them in the face... or
if necessary, (hot) tar and feather them, wring their necks, slit their throats,
or put a bullet in their heads... all of which would be to whittle away at their
resources (with a guillotine). We've had enough of the various pussy-footing specious
social philosophies being espoused. The Zeitgeist film is for intellectual (male)
dandies and (female) dainties. Whereas many are familiar with the expression that
the pen is mightier than the sword, this is only true so long as you're not using
invisible ink or some cryptic codification as the Zeitgeist film employs from an
artistic vantage point.

One of the Revolutionary films to be made is how a Cenocracy (New Government),
however it may be called, would actually function. Perhaps we should call the film
"The Zeitgeist Cenocracy" (A New Government for the Spirit of the Time). But there
are several films that need to be made concerning various issues all involving
the requirement for a New Government. We don't want to simply talk about adopting
a New Government or participate in some business, government and religion-orchestrated
diversion such as permitting some government-sponsored committee "to determine the
public's need for a government"... or some other spurious rubric to be used in
order for the government to provide a grant to a few friends and colleagues whose
committee action is supposed to give the impression of doing something but they
actually accomplish little more than wasting time.

Speaking with a Utopianist or New Age ideology is fine (even if one denies such
labels as an accurate description), but the people need to know how their
government is going to function with respect to current issue-events, and not as
a narrative inserted as part of a historical chronology formulated by way of
truncated data explicitly reserved for a given point of discussion involving an
intellectual departure to prove a point that has undergone only a minimal public
review process. In other words, the people need to know how such an idealist world
of purposed infrastructure might be reached, or whether the proposal falls far short
of the achievable once the creative spirit and industry of the public is unleashed
by a form of governance which unfetters them. If we permit the present government
to create policies of creative expression guided by the sensibilities of a status
quo that has learned how to navigate the sewer-ways produced by an oppressive
socialized politicalization ludicrously calling itself a democracy; then we participate
in a New Slavery contoured to the economic dictates of this age.

The adoption of a Cenocratic perspective, if not a full-blown Cenocracy... might
well provide the necessary social insight that The Venus Project is not the ultimate goal to be sought after, but is a mere
ideological stepping stone along a funneled path humanity's stride has
been obstructively detoured in concert with— in order that the people may be
better ambushed by so many self-centered businesses, governments and religions...
all of whom attempt to advocate their own version of "we-ness" to give the impression
of being a needed social viability. Such institutions would not like it if they woke
up one morning and were publicly subjected to the same selfishness and greed they
are permitted to indulge in against the people... And they would not like it if
their practiced fantasies just happened to burst by being pricked under the pressure
of spearheads wielded by a New Government social philosophy which treats them as
the vermin they are and eradicates them for the good of humanity. It's time humanity
got past the filthy obstacles by way of a Cenocracy.

The words "city", "town", "state", etc., are ideological concepts that humans
made up. Too many of us incline ourselves to adopting them as necessities represented
by a given structural practice. Humanity has got to think differently... outside
the influences of an environment whose decay is forcing us to comply biologically,
physicologically, emotionally and intellectually. Incremental effects over large
expanses of time increases the propensity for habitual creatures to accept habits
as truth without a viable alternative. Let us reemphacise: The Venus Project is not the ultimate goal to be sought after, but is a mere
ideological stepping stone.

The films we need to create will permit a means by which philosophically-based
thought experiments would be taken off mental chalk boards and placed into a similitude
of applied practicality, in order to give non-visual people a means to see ideas
put into a socialized application. The movies must strive to remove ambiguity,
prevarication and generalized superficiality from the introduction of a Cenocratic
approach. It is a view that quickly apprehends the similarity with the presented
image of the Venus Project as a modern day adaptation of some ancient Stonehenge
cosmology and philosophy, as if it offers us an incomparable age-old wisdom concealed
in a presumed library of time-forgotten simplicity, and is of great need for currently
mangled social conditions that needs to regain some Earth-instructive centrality
of purposive orientation that humanity needs to re-orient itself to in order to
achieve some imagined "oneness" with the nature and nurturance of the environment.

For example (denoted as being modifiable):

In one perspective of a Cenocracy movie we could show how the usage of a National
Referendum would be incorporated and the people would have their own Peoples Legislative
Branch as part of the Checks and Balances provision.

We can show how the Justice system will be revamped and that the Supreme
Court Justices would be directly answerable to the people.

Such a film would also need to address the issue that the type of so-called
Democracy being practiced is a ludicrous illusion being made to delude the people
and that how this situation was overcome by the adoption of a Cenocracy.

The movie will deal with the specifics of resource acquisition, usage and disruption.

It will show the people in charge of their government and not the other way
around as is presently being practiced because of the ludicrous "Representative"
model being used (and that a different "Representative" [Cenocratic] model would
suit us better).

It must be definitively shown that there are so many issues... so many wrongs
that need to be addressed, that the present systems of business, governments and
religions can not possibly address what is needed to be done. They do not have the
necessary vision nor philosophy either individually nor collectively.

The monetary system would be addressed with specifics as well as retirement
collections and payments.

A film about conducting a revolution can not be focused on typical story-telling
interests such as developing character profiles to pretend some artistic achievement.
The overall intent must be instructive about the desired Revolution and its intent
to develop a New Government, and not simply conduct a campaign for reestablishing
the same nonsense government with different players placed in old leadership roles
using the same ridiculous rules and regulations supported by idiotically-
sentimentalized government patriotisms, religion-oriented holidays, or business-
promoting standard operating procedures. Such criteria make for a stupid cast and
production. Nobody in their right mind would want to re-create the same nonsense
governments existing today, if some calamity occurred to destroy them. A movie
about a Real Revolution needs to give details about a rewritten Constitution and
Bill of Rights. It needs to explicitly show the adoption of a New type of governance
contrasted to the stupid and falsified Democracies of today.

We can not have a film
providing lip service portrayals for developing a Cenocracy (New Government), the
people must be shown details. Talk is cheap, particularly in the Movies. Far too
many inaccuracies are portrayed and excused as part of some ignorantly applied
"creative license" defense used to hide behind because the presumed artist lacks
the very talent they long for. This is true in actors, actresses, producers,
directors, writers and the rest. And even when such people do have talent, they
very often lack vision beyond their crossed finger-tips. Far too many ludicrously
think that making a cartoon (or interactive game) portraying human conditions is
a far-reaching vision of artistic talent applied to a context showing intricate
details suggesting a "real life" scenario is a great pseudo-Artificial Intelligence
accomplishment... even though the overall "message" or "tale" that is told, is but
a story interpreted as another fairy tale with no actual "real world" application.
It's way past the time to stop living in the world of games, cartoons and comic
books. These avenues of exploration are types of regressions that a creative populace
turns to when their artistically-oriented minds are oppressed in a governing structure
that produces policies that have developed an atmosphere of modernized slavery
and indentured servitude. Many non-creative people turn to personalized immoral
obscenities, socialized pornography or habituated criminality... or professions
which address these perversions from distant or close approximations— with
or without adopting some similarity to them. (For example, both creative and non-creative
people may become law enforcement, Social workers, Sociologists, Psychologists,
Politicians, Counselors, Clergy, etc., though they may also indulge in some "small"
indiscretion with the excuse that "nobody's perfect", or that the filth they have
wallowed in for so long as gotten them a bit soiled.)

We need to elucidate how the idea of practicing a "Separation of Powers" is a
political philosophy that is violated by a Legislature such as when Congressional
hearings take place. This situation readily shows that the government itself does
not value the abilities of the judiciary, and thinks it needs to be supplemented
by the efforts of those who think their legislative position not only entitles them
to pursue their own investigations and hold a court-like atmosphere, but that those
having acquired a legislative position are somehow automatically endowed with some
great legal understanding, investigative prowess, and wisdom that enables them to
best pursue an inquiry over those who are supposed to be trained with the
necessary skills. When the government itself does not trust the office of the
judiciary to pursue investigations of possible illegality, it stands that the
public should not as well. And if one argues that the legislature is acting as a
Moral Board of Judgment against those who would or do in fact cause harm to the
public, then it should be noted that the public has no means of conducting its
own investigation into the misjudgments and illegalities perpetrated by the government
against the public. The public are in desperate need of their own fully authorized
Legislative branch that can assume authority over any other branch if the collective
opinion of the public deems it necessary.

Government contracts and the Government Accounting Office would go through
severe alterations. We need to show not only the problems, but the solutions. We
do not want to be like those whose perspective is one of listing business,
government and religious abuses of power and position, but do not offer suggestions
of how to correct present and future problems beyond a mere stoppage or the equally
stupid notion of replacing one leader with another who will then comply with a
system that is part of the problem.

One of the movies to be done needs to show how the present processes of work-place
allocated differentiation (people performing specific functions but no one assigned
to be holistically inclined with multi-functionality); and how this permits the
whole enterprise to exhibit an excuse for not being blamed when something goes
amiss. The dirty secrets of a "chain-of-command" structure need to be unveiled.

The "Military/Industrial" complex and complement needs to be shown when it began
and why the nation has not militarily disbanded. We need to show the players in and
out of government as well as detailing the fact that "protection of the country"
is an excuse, a so-called "reason" by which vast sums of money and power can be
gained to be used as a tool and weapon for intimidation and bullyism. If necessary,
the film must show the players being executed and the resulting development of a
new type of governing philosophy where the industry of the nation will serve the
best interests of the people and not a few self-centered "hogs of greed".

We need to show how the legislative adoption of a long sought after change to
government policy is used by governments as an excuse not to alter policies to other
issues... in a piece-meal "give a little but keep most" attitude. For example, political
bodies often use the ridiculous "1 vote" measurement for denying the acceptance of
a popular electable person or policy that will dramatically alter the status quo...
though such a circumstances is said to be an occurrence with almost incalculable odds
of being achieved since many people do not vote and there are no laws detailing
citizenship with respect to mandated participatory voting because of erroneously
used definitions of liberty and freedom. ("Democracy, Freedom, Liberty") are used
as advertisements to persuade the public to buy-into maintaining a status-quo favorable
to a Few over the Many— who, once in a position of leadership, devise policies
and procedures which best enable them to retain their positions supportive of
government polices which help to sustain their interests... and the interests of
the many are not even asked to be declared nor defined.

The establishment of and guidelines for a National Health care would be formulated
into a practice... and the dire issues involving lobbying, lobbying careers and campaign
funding, as well as political party voting discriminations would be dealt with.

Environmental laws and Animal Rights would be instituted according to the
dictates of a public majority.

We will need to explicate how social mores such as homosexuality, pedophilia,
rape, spouse battering, violence, etc., could well be symptoms of degrading planetary
and social atmospheres which poison our physiology and genetics through multiple
generations, and are misidentified by Sociologists, Psychologists, Penologists,
Educators and interested others. They are symptoms of a disease which include the
design of a government producing policies and political circumstances (such as
having to choose between the lesser of evil candidates during an election).

The public needs to be dramatically shown there is a better way of life than
the nonsense they are presently asked to support through patriotic nonsense which
serve to keep a few in power.

A clear indication of the many betrayals suffered by the public due to those
in leadership positions, giving rise to social events (such as when voting); where
people take chances on those exhibiting extreme view points... because so called
normal "family value" campaigns have provided them with wolves in sheep's clothing.
Far too many leaders have fallen short of delivering what they promise as a cornerstone
of their office. They instead use their position to assist those who aided them
in their thrust for power, gain several hundred percentage points above and beyond
any resource that was used. (For example, Haliburton gained hundreds of millions
of dollars through non-bidding government contracts during Desert Storm, as a means
by which Cheney and Bush could pay back the company for campaign contributions.
Wars are often used as a means by which companies extract billions from the public
coffers.)

Voting requirements and tabulations would be standardized as well as mandatory
voting guidelines with penalties. Standardization of voting entails making voting
a compulsory duty of citizenship, though there are cases such as incarceration,
infirmity and mental illness prohibits such an exercise. (Prisoners should be given
the option of voting as part of a citizenship duty.) Compulsory voting (of face
extremely stiff fines, incarceration or deportation) must be advanced with the
ability of everyone, in a given electoral setting (county, city, state, federal),
to vote for anyone they want. Party affiliation should not be a means by which
people are forced to vote for someone they have no interest in. In addition, ballots
should have a standard "none of the above" selection and a write-in elective.
However, if voters do provide alternative selections for a political campaign, elections
can be forced to include a given selection of interested candidates that the public
must vote on.

Proposals for establishing a separate "business only" internet system should be put
forward and examined in the film as if it were a reality. This would permit those
seeking "information only" for a given topic of study would not be subjected to the
duping tactics some businesses employ to con people into buying their products.
All businesses should be required to take standardized customer service skill training,
along with customer/product disputation guidelines. Customers must be protected
from dispassionate company policies and companies must be protected from customers
trying to take advantage of one-sided "the customer is always right" policies.

Present practices for "Petitioning the Government" and writing to one's Congressional
Representative as a means to voice opinions for considering governing change will
be replaced with a more effective method involving the Peoples Legislative Branch.

Minimum and Maximum wages would be standardized as well as the process of a
guaranteed income... amongst other basic necessities.

The film would describe how some in the public may want a new car, lavish home,
expensive clothes or a lunch bag full of twinkies in order to fulfill some displaced
sexual orientation, but what they actually need is a new government, in order that
the social environment will be dramatically transformed into a landscape that influences
better personal and socially collective goals.

An examination of all government approved lottery operations will need to be
identified and given an account of. The lack of accountability practiced by the
government with respect to how much money is actually taken in, paid out, and the
uses of accumulated funds needs to be fully exposed so as to indicate how non-transparent
the government is. Its behavior in hiding the truth about the lottery is a clear
indication that the public is kept in the dark about multiple other issues... thus
revealing that the government does not belong to the people. Whereas police agencies
very regularly "follow the money" in the apprehension of those involved in criminal
activity, it is difficult for the public to know how extensive the criminality in
the lottery system actually is, because the public is not permitted to follow the
money trail and the police are provided with lottery incentives for not looking
too closely at the overall lottery system. They are paid to turn a blind eye to a
system which supports their livelihood. The loss of a lottery contract by one
company, helps the government conceal the amount of money that was taken and added
to its own coffers. Illegalities are covered up... with court costs and jail time
averted by the government reaping a large undisclosed dividend. If this were not
the case, then all monetary transactions of all lottery systems would be fully
public. Concealment equates with illegality.

All Utilities will become owned by the public and alternatives subsidized with
the explicit intention that they become self-sufficient within a given time period.
Contractors will be held responsible for all contractual over-runs and incomplete
projects will be addressed with standards assigned to felonies. The public's
funding of a project will not be take advantage of.

We will also need to provide the instructional representation of a New Education
system and how we need to deal with the irrationalities cropping up in different
groups throughout the country. Not least of which is the incessant "for profit"
greed which has turned our food manufacturing industries into apothecary shops for
dispensing various poisons to the public such as foods containing too much salt,
fat, sweetners, colorings, etc., along with fractionalized minimums of valuable
vitamins and minerals.

The public must forcibly be made aware of how it has been duped into using its
influence to encourage Education to be directed along a course of training people
for business interests because it does not want to use its own funds to do so. The
notion that educated training for a particular business interest is synonymous with
guaranteed employment is a fool's errand. The Business community simply wants to be
given the social entitlement of having a ready-made workforce pool from which to
get those who can be easily manipulated to share in a company's survival philosophy
by way of offered business-specific incentives. No guarantee of employment, much
less sustained employment... is ventured beyond some illusion of possibility. All too
often, even with specialized training, companies choose to out-source to those with
skills they can acquire at a lower cost. This is little more than a bait and switch
tactic.

The film must address modern activities of discrimination effected by those
using modernized versions of sleight-of-hand tactics in order that a company,
government or religion can give the impression of complying with anti-discrimination
laws. Very often we see a small percentage of one or another types of people being
used as store-front manikins that are socially visible and allow a given institution
to operate at or just above government guidelines because the adopted percentage of
a given population seen as a variable in the social equation of an anti-discrimination
consciousness (race, gender, age, personal orientations, handi-cap, etc...)
is not mathematically distinct. (Does employing one such person constitute anti-
discrimination compliance?) So long as there are one or two of this or that
population, an enterprise can claim they are not anti-discriminatory... and can
otherwise cite some excusable reason that a given person was not selected.

The film will indicate how lost and visionless many business, government and
religious leaders actually are, and will also benefit by being provided an alternative
governing perspective. This lack of vision is readily apparent when such entities
are given a windfall of direct cash or some favorable operational formula; they do
little with it except to pursue a means to solidify their current activities and
views, as well as rewarding those who are supportive. Their vision of a brighter
future is white-washing and embellishing past directive in the guise of modern
precepts. Time and effort are spent in glorifying the past by producing pseudo-"truthful"
documentaries, after documentary, after documentary, after historical review, etc...,
by those given funding to effect some usefully beneficial clarification of disagreement
that is ludicrously defined as being objective. They want to create a lasting history of
themselves built on a history of those who helped them get where they are.

As part of addressing the need for revamping the education system is the representation
of how often public school employees are provided sub-living wages, without benefits,
and that in the name of "business" even the Nation's class of professors and highly
educated others are denied tenureship. They must curtail and subsume their own
insightful knowledge in order to teach subject matter that falls short of increasing
"Higher Education" standards, just so they can keep a job by presenting students
with information and ideas which assist those in leadership positions to maintain
a status quo detrimental to a Nation's need for ever-improving upon its ability to
apply alternatives secured by advanced perspicuity.

The removal of presidential images from currency and other types of monuments would
be put into effect in order to rid the pathetic egotism so rampant in the government.

We need to show the public how a better society can evolve out of a form of governance
which gets rid of the insanity and disgusting practices the present form of government
is permitting to function under the rubric of "official" business, "secret" information
or some other notion born of childish preoccupations.

The film will also show how both the Constitution and Bill of Rights have been
rewritten to suit the needs of the people in the here and now while looking forward
to a brighter future, than the current incessant appeal to traditions and habits which
create conditions for perpetuating so many type of needless grief.

It must be emphasized that more people than not want to live contributory lives
but that present social circumstances prohibit them from doing so in order that some
ridiculously species status quo can be maintained as the means to prevent social
uprisings born by way of giving allowance to revolutionary thinking outside the
corridors of convention which are constrained to assist a few with sustained control
of resources for their personal growth at the expense of the many.

As part of a testimonial approach, the film could incorporate the interviews of
people who make a comparison with the present government and a Cenocracy, in order
to provide a visible proof of acceptance.

Overall, the film will show the public the recognition of disgusting business,
political, and religious practices and how they were overcome with respect to a
better form of governance at the behest of a populace that only needed to be provided
with a glimpse of an alternative road; like the divergent path along which the trek
of humanity took to reach the present socially destructive impasse of today.

Such a film is long overdue... but the subject matter must be approached from
the vantage point of an instructor whose different class sessions must be taught
according to the elements being indicated by the overall class personality and its
individual student characteristics. In other words, effective teachers are more
instructive if material is structured in accord with the dynamics of a given
assemblage of students. However, it is not that there aren't scores of unknown
excellent actors, actresses, writers and numerous others who would gladly participate
in making a film against the ridiculous form of governance we are now forced to
endure, it's just that all of us haven't found anyone with the necessary form of
Zeitgiest innative to finance such a film... in order to instigate the
desperately needed revolution of transferring ideology into actuality.

The talent of this nation in multiple avenues of human endeavour is going to
waste because those who have the means of funding, lack the vision of trial and
error adventurism, just like the government lacks the vision of self-improvement
by not giving the public a chance to solve its own social issues without being
chained to governing policies that are part of the problem. The government is
standing at the gates of liberty and actual freedom and won't let the people get
past... like a king who has lifted the drawbridge and refuses to fairly redistribute
the wealth of the kingdom that the people themselves were forced to provide... but
not be able to equally enjoy. This is why the people are speaking of a Revolution.

Neither Hollywood nor Bollywood, as well as numerous other production companies...
appear to have the courage to do such a film without incorporating their own many-flavored
back-scratching voyeurisms, vulgarity and vapid narcissistic inebriations running
rampant in motion pictures... particularly those made from the perspective of the
British indulgences in pornographic inclinations and mis-managed anger that are more
in tune with bestiality or some socio-pathology, than any semblance of sophisticated
sensibility and sensitivity. Their usage of "production sexualty" is not artistic
creativity, it is the abandonment of the creative license for lawless lust born from
a culture whose inhibitions are being eroded by a wide-spread cultural acceptance of
socially practiced alcohol-induced mental degradation... now stupidly being accepted
by segments in many other cultures. Such forms of artistic expression are little more
than the scribblings of 3-year-old children (at the level of adult chimpanzees) never
before having held crayons, colored pencils, markers or paint brushes. With little
artistic vision, they attempt to excuse themselves with overly-employed emotive
indulgences catering to sadomasochistic meanderings attempting to find a projected
means of expression so that a resolution for their mental illness might be found...
and thus having created a false-hope social syndrome phenomena having followed after
the enterprise of a self-help literary genre.

The formation of a Cenocratic Production Company, if funded properly, can instigate
wide-spread discussions and directive application of individual energies towards
the development of a new form of government so desperately needed. The making of
movies with this in mind is one approach, others involve purposive protests with
strategies which trespass traditionalized normative efforts that have little expressive
results. We can show different approaches towards conducting such a revolution and
the possible responses of those in social leadership positions (who may resort to
the old standby of policing interdictions, or more subtle approaches such as involving
internalized instigations of rift in order to conquer by way of division, creating
falsified illegalities so as to stir negative public opinion... as well as the
reactions of the general public provoked into some otherwise dormant pseudo-patriotism
protecting freedoms under the currently practiced false democracy. All the while our
intent is to promote the design of a Cenocracy... as an equation with adaptive
variables, or as a conglomeration of serendipitous events. Because the time, place
and manner of Revolution is indeed a difficult aura of the collective social karma
to predict. Sometimes it is explosive, and at other times it solicitates vibrations,
oscillations, or echos that become focused like divergent sources of energy passing
through a prism and exiting as a single entity.

Some readers may be interested in a comment attributed to Noam Chomsky about the
Zeitgeist and Venus Project movies:

Noam Chomsky on Zeitgeist & Venus Project

“I don’t regard The zeitgeist Movement as an activist movement. Rather, it seems
to me to be a very passive movement that is misled by doctrines that have a pleasant
sound, but collapse on analysis. Among them is the idea that we should “stop supporting
the system” and should not “fight it,” that is seek to change and overcome it. That
means that we should withdraw into passivity. Nothing could be more welcome to those
with power. My feeling is that however sincere the leaders and participants may be,
the movement is seriously misguided. It is not leading towards change, but is undermining
it by encouraging passivity and withdrawal from engagement, and offering a false
sense that some real alternative is being proposed, except in terms so abstract and
divorced from reality as to be virtually meaningless.” Noam Chomsky [2009]
(Retrieved via google item: "Zeitgeist is a mind heist – venus project is a scam?")